How did you first come to use cleaning products as tools for art-making rather than seeing them purely as domestic materials?
”It started at the airport. I grew up between the U.S. and Côte d’Ivoire, and I have vivid memories of my mother packing giant cardboard boxes with food and cleaning supplies, Windex, Kleenex, Charmin, Dove. American products she insisted on bringing home. These weren’t just household items; they were symbols. Of care, yes, but also of access. Of survival. Of the fantasy that Western goods could somehow clean up the mess of postcolonial life.
Have you ever seen an African at the airport? That was me. Buried in boxes.
Sometimes the boxes were too heavy and had to be opened in front of everyone. The contents: soap, disinfectant, air freshener, would be pulled out and redistributed while strangers watched. I remember feeling both pride and humiliation. Everyone could see who I was because they could see what I had. And for a second, I became the paper towel or the soap, exposed, carried, sorted, judged, shipped.
You know the expression “you are what you eat”? I started to believe in “you are what you pack.” My material practice begins there, In that absurdity, that contradiction, that inheritance.
Cleaning products are never neutral. They’re scented with gender, race, class, and capital. The myth of the sanitized space has always been a way to exclude certain bodies. So I use them. Not to clean, but to expose. I bleach paper towels, dye them, print on them, sculpt with them, turning them into surfaces that shimmer and slouch, pretending to be delicate while holding everything up. They reference the aesthetics of minimalism, color-field painting, domestic labor, and bureaucratic failure, all at once.
This comes through in works like Primitivism, a performative sculpture in which a Bird-of-Paradise flower and a bottle of Windex ceremoniously die in each other’s arms. In Côte d’Ivoire, the flower is common, a roadside flourish, stripped of its exoticism. But Windex? That’s luxury. Imported, expensive, almost sacred. To own it is to flex proximity to whiteness, to modernity, to purity, to the West. Meanwhile, in the U.S., the flower becomes a rare commodity, and the Windex is reduced to the tool of the cleaning lady, seen but never valued.
By locking them in a tragic embrace, a flower and a cleaning product in a kind of suicide pact, I expose the illusions of cleanliness, desire, and commodity. It’s a still life with no intention of staying still. A love story, yes, but also a collapse.
My work doesn’t just “recontextualize” domesticity. It implicates it. It asks: who gets cleaned up, and who gets wiped away?”